Lather me with blather -- DRAFT thread 4

[closg00]

Who's to say the Wizards haven't sent guys to his other workouts? It's cost effective.And I'm sure they don't want to overplay their hand, or get a sense of what we're trying to do.

Agreed. I'm not concerned. Maybe they overdo it with their gamesmanship, but I'm sure they're doing their due dilligence.

OTOH, we didn't workout Seraphin or Pech and drafted both so....

[NbdyBeatsTheWiz]

Speaking of these guys "other workouts" anybody hear how the Leonard, Singleton, Hamilton workout went? As in who stuck out, who failed to impress, etc... Because we could definitely be tapping into that talent pool.

[fishercob]

Jeepers: continuity error, time travel paradox, parallel universes. Lookit Fisher with the me-too threadnapping. Shame. Shakin' my head.

Wah.

[doclinkin]

Jeepers: continuity error, time travel paradox, parallel universes. Lookit Fisher with the me-too threadnapping. Shame. Shakin' my head.

Wah.

Exactly.


Here though: I disabled BBCode on the first post, copy and edit the links into your first post so we can find the others as needed

viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1117528&p=28235699#p28235699

[dobrojim]

Just because the Kanter camp hasn't heard directly from us to me means
absolutely nothing. Wall has already said he would be a good choice.
Kanter's camp has already said he would like to come here.
To go further along that road would probably be counter-productive.
The talk of trading up for DWill might or might not be a smokescreen.
I'm not sure I give up McGee to get him, probably not. I do like DWill
a lot and think he'll be a better defensive player than some of the
player comparisons that have been made would suggest. I also think
he's a hi IQ type player that knows how to play ie is a winner.
But I might just take Kanter before him not that there is probably
a scenario where we'd have a choice outside of trading McGee.

it's crazy this time of year - hard to believe anything you read or hear.

[fishercob]

it's crazy this time of year - hard to believe anything you read or hear.

Yep. I make absolutely nothing of the "we haven't heard from the Wizards" bit.

If there is indeed a mutual love affair between Enes and Ernie (someone get the Wizznutzz into the Mothering Hut like now), it could be as at a disadvantage in potential trade-ups. Better to make teams think we're content where we are and that we're not here for the pillaging -- then spring a modest and fair offer on them on draft night if need be.

Or maybe Ernie wants word out that he's cooled on Kanter to plant the seed of doubt in the few teams above us who are considering him -- and they pass on him and he slips to us outright.

Or maybe the camps have been in frequent contact and have agreed that it's best to lie to the media about that very fact. As has been stated, what important info are we going to learn from a workout at this point? That Kwame Brown is the future of this franchise?

I agree with Givony that these workouts in that weighting these workouts is a bit like cramming for the bar exam. If you haven't done your research before now, you're screwed. We supposedly have devoted a lot of new resources to foreign scouting; i suspect Ernie has a fully formed opinion of what Kanter is or isn't.

It's a total poker game right now.

[fishercob]

Jeepers: continuity error, time travel paradox, parallel universes. Lookit Fisher with the me-too threadnapping. Shame. Shakin' my head.

Wah.

Exactly.


Here though: I disabled BBCode on the first post, copy and edit the links into your first post so we can find the others as needed

viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1117528&p=28235699#p28235699

Done. Take it as a compliment. I wanted the word "blather" to live on.

Speaking of, where's badinage? I miss that guy.

[GhostsOfGil]

fish, this thread title = win

[NbdyBeatsTheWiz]

to answer my own question, the Bobcats website has lots of video and writeup on the recent workout with Hamilton, Tobias Harris, Leonard, Singleton, Parsons, and Honeycutt.

Out of the whole bunch Silas singled out Singleton (pun intended) as the guy who stood out for his defense and IQ. (which will suck if they decide he's worth it at #9... still holding out hope he somehow lasts til 18)

[dobrojim]

If Kanter isn't there @6 (or DWill duh) I'm not sure I don't just
go ahead and take Singleton there. Is it a reach? Definitely.
Like him a lot as a player though.

+1 on Fish's comments on possible Wiz-EK interactions.
Any of that might be going on. We just don't know.

[gesa2]

If Kanter isn't there @6 (or DWill duh) I'm not sure I don't just
go ahead and take Singleton there. Is it a reach? Definitely.
Like him a lot as a player though.

+1 on Fish's comments on possible Wiz-EK interactions.
Any of that might be going on. We just don't know.

I'd prob go Kanter, Valanciunas, Singleton, but I pretty much agree with you. And Fish for that matter. Ernie NOT showing signs of liking a player is Ernie showing signs of liking a player.

[theboomking]

If Kanter isn't there @6 (or DWill duh) I'm not sure I don't just
go ahead and take Singleton there. Is it a reach? Definitely.
Like him a lot as a player though.

+1 on Fish's comments on possible Wiz-EK interactions.
Any of that might be going on. We just don't know.

I'd prob go Kanter, Valanciunas, Singleton, but I pretty much agree with you. And Fish for that matter. Ernie NOT showing signs of liking a player is Ernie showing signs of liking a player.

I also agree. I like Singleton better than Leonard and Vesely. I would consider taking him at 6 if Jonas and Kanter and Williams are off the board.

[Ruzious]

If both Kanter and Jonas are gone at 6, trade up - even if you're "losing the trade". Getting more "value" should not be the primary objective of any trade. It should be improving the future of the team.

[dobrojim]

not sure I follow your logic - getting the best value, assuming you
equate value with talent that helps you win, HAS to be the
object of any trade. Agree with the conclusion, it has to be
the improvement of the team, but if you're losing the trade,
not because you helped the other team more, but because you
gave up more/better talent than you received, did you improve
the future of your team?

maybe I'm getting lost in semantics

[theboomking]

not sure I follow your logic - getting the best value, assuming you
equate value with talent that helps you win, HAS to be the
object of any trade. Agree with the conclusion, it has to be
the improvement of the team, but if you're losing the trade,
not because you helped the other team more, but because you
gave up more/better talent than you received, did you improve
the future of your team?

maybe I'm getting lost in semantics

He is saying that you shouldn't be using a draft value chart like the one popularized by Jimmy Johnson, and often referred to when evaluating trades in the NFL draft. If you have to overpay by giving up an extra mid first, or a player like Crawford who isn't likely to be a quality starter on a championship team, you do it if there is a player that could be a solid on a championship team and make some All Star games. The NBA is about getting a few superlative players and building around them. Building a solid core without those few superlative players does not generally yield championships. It yields teams that yield from mediocre to good, but not great.

[dobrojim]

gotcha

the first 8-9 players (on your roster) are the ones that matter until the
injuries come into the picture. So you need to maximize the talent
amongst those 8-9 players.

The issue with our team though is whether it is a better
risk when we only have 3-4 (maybe if we're being generous
and/or optimistic) to add one definite keeper to that 8-9
rotation or more than one with the potential but less
certain future of becoming a useful rotation player.

I can see some merit in either strategy and to me it
depends on the specifics of the case ie the players
you are talking about.

Is there still a consensus that this draft is very
even after the first couple/few picks? Not much
difference from somewhere around where we pick
the first and where we pick the second time?

[WizarDynasty]

dallas could really use a guy like crawford deep in playoffs off the bench

[dobrojim]

I think Terry >>> than Crawford right now

the question about Crawford is where will he be in 2-3 years

[closg00]

This was a good read and very timely.

International Draft Grades: 2006-10

With the 2011 NBA Draft coming up on June 23rd and the news a couple days ago 2009 first-round pick Ricky Rubio will join the Minnesota Timberwolves from Spain for the 2011-12 season (whenever it begins), it's a good time to take a look at international draft picks in general. Are certain teams better at drafting international players than others? Do some get better talent? Are others better at converting the picks into roster players?

First we have to set some criteria. For this purpose, an "international" pick is a player who did not attend a college in the United States.

1 – How many times did the team choose an international prospect?

2 – Did the team convert the draft pick to a roster player? If that player hasn't come to the NBA yet, then how much talent he has doesn't matter that much. If a team traded the player's rights for an asset and he became a NBA player, the drafting team gets credit.

3 – Once in the NBA, was that player worthy of his draft status? Relative to non-international players chosen in the same area of that draft, was he more, the same, or less productive?

Based on that, let's grade each of the 30 NBA teams based on their drafting of international players from the 2006-2010 NBA Drafts. Each team is listed with the who and when of international picks from that timeframe (in the case of draft night trades, the player is listed with the acquiring team since most of the time that player is drafted specifically for the trade).
..................................................................................................................................
Washington Wizards: Oleksiy Pecherov (2006, #18), Vladimir Veeremenko (2006, #48), Kevin Seraphin (2010, #17), Nemanja Bjelica (2010, #35)

Pecherov played three seasons in the NBA – two with Washington – while Veeremenko and Bjelica have yet to make an appearance. Seraphin was a decently rated player in last year's draft, but Washington chose to have Chicago draft him for them as part of the Kirk Hinrich trade, where they absorbed the contract using their cap space. As a rookie last season Seraphin played only 10.9 minutes in 58 games, but did score in double digits twice. More will be expected of him next year.

Grade: C+

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=20017

[Ruzious]

not sure I follow your logic - getting the best value, assuming you
equate value with talent that helps you win, HAS to be the
object of any trade. Agree with the conclusion, it has to be
the improvement of the team, but if you're losing the trade,
not because you helped the other team more, but because you
gave up more/better talent than you received, did you improve
the future of your team?

maybe I'm getting lost in semantics

He is saying that you shouldn't be using a draft value chart like the one popularized by Jimmy Johnson, and often referred to when evaluating trades in the NFL draft. If you have to overpay by giving up an extra mid first, or a player like Crawford who isn't likely to be a quality starter on a championship team, you do it if there is a player that could be a solid on a championship team and make some All Star games. The NBA is about getting a few superlative players and building around them. Building a solid core without those few superlative players does not generally yield championships. It yields teams that yield from mediocre to good, but not great.

I couldn't have said it better.